5 ms·

Are you saying that the motive for posting a bread recipe that starts with 5000 words about the history of bread will evaporate, so we'll be left with websites

Are you saying that the motive for posting a bread recipe that starts with 5000 words about the history of bread will evaporate, so we'll be left with websites from enthusiasts who have something interesting to say?

micromacrofoot 4y ago
maybe… but will an ai search even tell you those sites exist?
- pvarangot 4y ago
  It will tell you the information. Information wants to be free. Right?
  - coffeebeqn 4y ago
    Free to be harvested and monopolized by a few giant corporations..
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  If it is designed and prompted to be able to reference sites rather than just give freestanding “answers” with no context, yes.
dahwolf 4y ago
You think AI will stop and pause as it comes across your "interesting things"? Hey look, it's enthusiast content, let's send our users directly to their website? I don't think so. It's going to be vacuumed into the big machine and nobody will visit those websites. In fairness, pretty much nobody does today.
- brookst 4y ago
  So what? As an enthusiast am I supposed to be motivated by the page counter on my site? Besides, good writers are good writers. Would you rather read Matt Levine or some AI summary of his latest piece? I'm just not seeing the problem. IMO the whole obsession with driving clicks was silly from the get-go and destructive now. If AI does away with that, great. And if people whose sole motivation for writing was to get clicks decide to stop writing... well, OK.
  - ipaddr 4y ago
    In this future there is no Matt Levine because he can't make a living getting viewers and no replacement.
    - brookst 4y ago
      Why are viewers the only way to make a living? It wasn't always that way.
      - ipaddr 4y ago
        It was always this way. If no one buys your paper you shutdown writers have no jobs and stop writing. If no one buys your book same deal. What era are you referring to?
        swores 4y ago
        Well there were eras before mass publication when some people still wrote, about science or history or whatever, either because they were funded by their religion or by personal money or by a rich benefactor. Of course it was a tiny % of people doing that, but then again it was only a tiny % who could learn to read and write or afford to spend time on hobbies.
        brookst 4y ago
        If that were true there would be no new writers, because nobody paid them to write their first book. In fact, most first books don't sell at all. And yet... people write. Not everyone is 100% motivated by money. And those that are do not all need full time employment doing that work. And those that need money and employment can often generate revenue with complementary goods. And those that can't can source subscription and other revenue sources. The idea that the current model of commercialization of writing is the only one that has ever or could ever work is really narrow thinking. Writing has two main values: 1) the ideas, and 2) the expression. Both of those have put food on the table for good writers forever, and will continue to do so. The AI panic is just from people who can't imagine the world being any different than it is at this very instant.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- eloisius 4y ago
  Traditional search engines aren’t going away for a long time, even if they are hybridized with LLM quick answers. My favorite websites about bike touring or someone’s tech blog will still be findable, and perhaps less buried under junk once content marketing is worthless.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
hoppyhoppy2 4y ago
I'm a little worried about the coming flood of AI-generated "recipes" that fit some linguistic model but have never been cooked by any human.
- droopyEyelids 4y ago
  I've been using ChatGPT to generate recipes both for things I already cook, and for things I'm new to cooking and testing the result against what I find online. So far it's a good cook! There are times when an ingredient appears in different amounts than I'd expect (like 1c of oil for a 4c/flour taralli recipe) but overall it's comparable to the quality of human written recipes, and better than many.
  - dingledork69 4y ago
    Just don't use it for baking. It often seems to skip steps, even when summarizing existing recipes.
- benjaminsky2 4y ago
  I did that the other day. I cooked a kadai chicken recipe verbatim from ChatGPT. It wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t amazing either.

micromacrofoot 4y ago

maybe… but will an ai search even tell you those sites exist?

pvarangot 4y ago
It will tell you the information. Information wants to be free. Right?
- coffeebeqn 4y ago
  Free to be harvested and monopolized by a few giant corporations..
dragonwriter 4y ago
If it is designed and prompted to be able to reference sites rather than just give freestanding “answers” with no context, yes.

dahwolf 4y ago

You think AI will stop and pause as it comes across your "interesting things"? Hey look, it's enthusiast content, let's send our users directly to their website? I don't think so. It's going to be vacuumed into the big machine and nobody will visit those websites. In fairness, pretty much nobody does today.

brookst 4y ago
So what? As an enthusiast am I supposed to be motivated by the page counter on my site? Besides, good writers are good writers. Would you rather read Matt Levine or some AI summary of his latest piece? I'm just not seeing the problem. IMO the whole obsession with driving clicks was silly from the get-go and destructive now. If AI does away with that, great. And if people whose sole motivation for writing was to get clicks decide to stop writing... well, OK.
- ipaddr 4y ago
  In this future there is no Matt Levine because he can't make a living getting viewers and no replacement.
  - brookst 4y ago
    Why are viewers the only way to make a living? It wasn't always that way.
    - ipaddr 4y ago
      It was always this way. If no one buys your paper you shutdown writers have no jobs and stop writing. If no one buys your book same deal. What era are you referring to?
      - swores 4y ago
        Well there were eras before mass publication when some people still wrote, about science or history or whatever, either because they were funded by their religion or by personal money or by a rich benefactor. Of course it was a tiny % of people doing that, but then again it was only a tiny % who could learn to read and write or afford to spend time on hobbies.
      - brookst 4y ago
        If that were true there would be no new writers, because nobody paid them to write their first book. In fact, most first books don't sell at all. And yet... people write. Not everyone is 100% motivated by money. And those that are do not all need full time employment doing that work. And those that need money and employment can often generate revenue with complementary goods. And those that can't can source subscription and other revenue sources. The idea that the current model of commercialization of writing is the only one that has ever or could ever work is really narrow thinking. Writing has two main values: 1) the ideas, and 2) the expression. Both of those have put food on the table for good writers forever, and will continue to do so. The AI panic is just from people who can't imagine the world being any different than it is at this very instant.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
eloisius 4y ago
Traditional search engines aren’t going away for a long time, even if they are hybridized with LLM quick answers. My favorite websites about bike touring or someone’s tech blog will still be findable, and perhaps less buried under junk once content marketing is worthless.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

hoppyhoppy2 4y ago

I'm a little worried about the coming flood of AI-generated "recipes" that fit some linguistic model but have never been cooked by any human.

droopyEyelids 4y ago
I've been using ChatGPT to generate recipes both for things I already cook, and for things I'm new to cooking and testing the result against what I find online. So far it's a good cook! There are times when an ingredient appears in different amounts than I'd expect (like 1c of oil for a 4c/flour taralli recipe) but overall it's comparable to the quality of human written recipes, and better than many.
- dingledork69 4y ago
  Just don't use it for baking. It often seems to skip steps, even when summarizing existing recipes.
benjaminsky2 4y ago
I did that the other day. I cooked a kadai chicken recipe verbatim from ChatGPT. It wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t amazing either.